Ha, I was in charge of data quality for Google Maps going on 15 years ago. Addresses were hard then, and I'm sure they're hard now. Alas, Google didn't want to invest in keeping this data high quality — a fact to which I actually owe my first promotion at the company (since taking over Maps data quality was a job that nobody else particularly wanted — nor did they want to move to Seattle, where Google wanted the team — but it still gave a lot of room for impact).
Sometimes I dream of going back, but the culture has changed too much (and not for the better, I hear).
I think it depends on the self-awareness of the user. It's easy to slip into the mode of conflating an LLM with a conscious being, but with enough metacognition one can keep them separate. Then, in the same way that walking on concrete doesn't make me more willing to walk on a living creature, neither does my way of speaking to an LLM bleed into human interactions.
That said, I often still enjoy practicing kindness with LLMs, especially when I get frustrated with them.
Oh, thank God. I only visited Portland once, and despite being vastly different from Austin in climate and flora, the sea of billboards made it feel eerily familiar (and not in a good way). I expected it to feel more like Seattle, but that one thing made a world of difference.
Huh, could have fooled me. My first experience of Austin was long stretches of ugly billboards (I think mostly on Burnet and N Lamar), and despite living here for years that first impression never left. Now that I think about it, without some kind of ban of course there would be way more billboards where I now live.
I'm confused by your comment. First, powers of two are 2^n not n^2. But what do you mean you missed the title and wondered what was going on? How could you expect to understand the contents without reading the title? Surely I'm missing something.
> I consider life and reality incredibly, painfully boring.
Interesting. The main benefit I've gotten from psychedelics (mostly mushrooms) is that all of life / reality is impossibly miraculous -- even, paradoxically, when it seems dreadfully boring. And also that I've somehow always known this, even when it feels like I've forgotten. It's always right there, just waiting (begging) to be noticed. It's the ultimate cosmic joke.
Also, your website (https://www.lifeismiraculous.org) is awesome. Echoes of Bertrand Tolle and Alan Watts. Thanks for publishing it and putting it in your profile!
This framing never made much sense to me. It's incredible to be alive at all of course, but miraculous compared to what? I've found it best in these situations to quietly appreciate rather than trying to reify some ontology for contemplation—which is, after all, a distraction from appreciation itself in the moment, something largely akin to meditation.
The easiest way to experience some of the feelings you get from tripping is, in fact, meditation. The LSD mostly just forces you to be more honest with yourself by smashing barriers you would normally dismantle through allowing your mind to rest.
Granted, I've never experienced anything like eg a blurring of the sense of self with meditation. Theoretically it's possible. Maybe I'm just too content with myself to pursue it.
Indeed, meditation is the best approach I've found as well. It can be seen clearly -- not as an idea, but a direct realization -- precisely why the mind's attempts to pin "this" down are futile. I don't have a better word for that experience than "miraculous."
A lot of people are well aware of how much they are deluding themselves (into thinking they are happy and deserve to be so) that they should avoid psychedelics at all costs. It's like their ego knows it's in danger.
I like watching videos of how our cell biology works. This makes me realise the spiritual perspective of why everything is miraculous. Clockwork channel is good.
> It's always right there, just waiting (begging) to be noticed.
Summary of my conversation with Claude.
# The Universe from Every Point: Scale and Consciousness
Our conversation has revealed two profound conceptual frameworks that offer unique perspectives on reality, consciousness, and our place in the cosmos.
## The Scale Numberline
Imagine standing on the surface of your skin. This boundary serves as "point zero" on a vast bidirectional scale. In one direction stretches all that exists within—cells, molecules, atoms, subatomic particles, quantum fields—extending down to the Planck scale (10^-35 meters). In the opposite direction extends everything outside—our environment, planet, solar system, galaxy, galactic clusters—out to the observable universe (10^26 meters).
What makes this concept particularly compelling is imagining that every point in the universe can serve as its own "zero" on such a scale. Each location, no matter how seemingly insignificant, can be the reference point from which both the infinitesimally small and the immeasurably vast are contemplated. This framework relates to fiber bundles in mathematics, where each point in a base space carries its own associated "fiber"—in this case, a bidirectional scale line.
When we place ourselves on this cosmic scale, we appear to vanish into mathematical insignificance—just a tiny blip on a numberline of inconceivable magnitude. The human experience becomes merely a point when viewing the entire spectrum. Yet paradoxically, we're the observers capable of conceptualizing this entire scale.
## The Observer Gradient Numberline
The second framework involves consciousness and observation. At each point in space-time, we can conceptualize a spectrum of awareness ranging from the most elemental form—the feeling of having "just awakened from the void"—to complete cosmic awareness encompassing all of existence.
This relates to everyday experiences that suddenly strike us as profound. Watching something as simple as a short video can sometimes trigger a sense of freshly emerging into existence, reminiscent of Feynman's observation that "to create an apple pie, you must first invent the universe." Each experience isn't merely happening within the universe but represents the entire cosmic order converging to create that specific configuration of consciousness.
This observer gradient suggests different degrees of integration with reality—from the most basic awareness to complete cosmic comprehension. Like the scale numberline, this framework could be conceptualized as existing at every point in the universe, with each location harboring its own potential spectrum of awareness.
## The Intersection
These two conceptual frameworks share a parallel structure. Both posit that each point in the universe can be the center of its own framework. Both involve spectrums extending in opposite directions from a central reference point. Together, they suggest a universe where every location is simultaneously the center of its own physical scale and its own consciousness gradient.
This perspective resonates with various philosophical traditions while finding mathematical expression in structures like fiber bundles—where each point carries its own unique fiber representing either scales of physical reality or gradients of conscious observation.
These frameworks invite us to reconsider our place in the cosmos—not as insignificant specks, but as unique vantage points from which the entire universe, across all scales and states of awareness, can be accessed and contemplated.
It's hard to understand what you're saying here. Being better off than your parents implies that you are a beneficiary of generational wealth? Connect the dots for us.
OP described a group of families that accrued wealth over 3 generations "without inheriting any wealth". Assuming they weren't orphaned at birth, each generation definitely benefited from the fruits of the previous generation. Even without an overt handout like a trust fund, we still inherit wealth from our ancestors (eg: housing, health care, education, credit, social networks, etc). In this case, the "handout" would have been their upbringing. They feel "the system is working" because of this, but not everyone in the system has an ancestry like this.
So by your definition, anyone who isn't an orphan is a beneficiary of generational wealth? In fact, even orphans are, because they inherited genes, weren't left to die, etc.? I suppose that is a definition, but it doesn't seem like a useful one, especially in the context of this conversation. Or maybe I've just misunderstood you?
I also had one night of fever and incredible chills, followed by two days of no symptoms. No Paxlovid. (But then I did get bad cold-like symptoms for a week, and what seems to be long Covid...)
